I have been using bookmarks to label subprojects locally and in my forks of petsc.<div>Admittedly, that usage was rather pedestrian, but at least at that level they seemed to be fine.</div><div>Dmitry.</div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Barry Smith <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bsmith@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">bsmith@mcs.anl.gov</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
On Nov 16, 2012, at 3:45 PM, Jed Brown <<a href="mailto:jedbrown@mcs.anl.gov">jedbrown@mcs.anl.gov</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> I think we could nicely do petsc-dev, petsc-release, and one buildsystem managed as a subrepo.<br>
<br>
</div> I'm willing to try this.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Barry<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
><br>
> We could do one petsc too, bit hg branches/bookmarks kinda suck so I don't think it would be as nice.<br>
><br>
> On Nov 16, 2012 4:32 PM, "Satish Balay" <<a href="mailto:balay@mcs.anl.gov">balay@mcs.anl.gov</a>> wrote:<br>
> to rephrase - do we do:<br>
><br>
> 1. petsc, buildsystem, petsc-release, buildsystem-release<br>
> 2. petsc-dev, buildsystem-dev, petsc-release, buildsystem-release<br>
> 3. petsc-dev, buildsystem, petsc-release, buildsystem-release<br>
> 4. something else?<br>
><br>
> satish<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Satish Balay wrote:<br>
><br>
> > Do you want to have the repo name as 'buildsystem' or<br>
> > 'buildsystem-dev'?<br>
> ><br>
> > note: reclones shouldn't be need for such renames [or url changes] -<br>
> > but one is free to do that if they want to..<br>
> ><br>
> > Satish<br>
> ><br>
> > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Barry Smith wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > I am not advocating fixing all capitalizations at this time, just BuildSystems.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Plus we should tell everyone to completely reclone anyways.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Keeping the in consist BuildSystem just to prevent a small number of temporary hiccups is not a good idea. We're writing PETSc not lapack.<br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > Barry<br>
> > ><br>
> > > On Nov 16, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Satish Balay <<a href="mailto:balay@mcs.anl.gov">balay@mcs.anl.gov</a>> wrote:<br>
> > ><br>
> > > > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Barry Smith wrote:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >> On Nov 16, 2012, at 11:14 AM, Satish Balay <<a href="mailto:balay@mcs.anl.gov">balay@mcs.anl.gov</a>> wrote:<br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >>> I'm in the process of migrating repos from <a href="http://petsc.cs.iit.edu" target="_blank">petsc.cs.iit.edu</a> to<br>
> > > >>> <a href="http://bitbucket.org" target="_blank">bitbucket.org</a>, and have to resolve a few organization issues.<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> Restrictions.<br>
> > > >>> - all repos should be lowercase<br>
> > > >>> - no subdir organization possible [like <a href="http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/externalpackages/" target="_blank">http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/externalpackages/</a>]<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> 1. Since we are forced to change reponame from 'BuildSystem' to<br>
> > > >>> 'buildsystem' - I'd like to take this opportunity to change it to<br>
> > > >>> 'buildsystem-dev' to be consistent with petsc-dev. i.e instructions<br>
> > > >>> will be:<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> hg clone <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc-dev" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc-dev</a><br>
> > > >>> hg clone <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/buildsystem-dev" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/buildsystem-dev</a> petsc-dev/config/BuildSystem<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> or<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> hg clone <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc-release" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc-release</a><br>
> > > >>> hg clone <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/buildsystem-release" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/buildsystem-release</a> petsc-release/config/BuildSystem<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> and current clones would need updates to .hg/hgrc only.<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> one alternative was to change the path in source to<br>
> > > >>> petsc-dev/config/buildsystem but it will cause some breakage and other<br>
> > > >>> inconsistencies in source file naming scheming - so I'm against that<br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >> What breakage. I really don't like having caps in one place and small letters in another. Horrible inconsistency<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > I guess one can anticipate all issues and make configure deal with<br>
> > > > them. [with autofix - or with an error message]. The couple of<br>
> > > > issues I was thinking off:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > - different organization between petsc-release and buildsystem confusing<br>
> > > > users.<br>
> > > > - configure might automatically create a new 'buildsystem' clone - when<br>
> > > > the user might still have BuildSystem - and attempt to make changes there.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > - bisection might need manual tweaking if if needs to go back and<br>
> > > > forth over this changepoint [from BuildSystem to buildsystem]<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Also we won't have consistant naming of 'reop' to 'file' anyway. So I<br>
> > > > see not much motivation to preserve the 'lowercase' part of the<br>
> > > > attribute.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > i.e buildsystem-dev -> buildsystem<br>
> > > > buildsystem-release -> buildsystem<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Also with this rename - lot of sourcefiles/dirs have to be renamed<br>
> > > > [for a consistant lowercase naming scheme] - loosing annotations in<br>
> > > > mercurial history [perhaps mercurial should handle this automatically<br>
> > > > - but I haven't checked it in depth].<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Satish<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >> Barry<br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> another alternative is to use 'petsc', 'buildsystem', 'petsc-release',<br>
> > > >>> 'buildsystem-release' [but we have too much baggage referring to<br>
> > > >>> petsc-dev, with a mailing list etc reusing this name]<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> 2. I plan to reorganize external package repos [that we might have<br>
> > > >>> patches for] with a pkg prefix.<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> i.e<br>
> > > >>> <a href="http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/externalpackages/metis-5.0.2" target="_blank">http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/externalpackages/metis-5.0.2</a><br>
> > > >>> <a href="http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/externalpackages/parmetis-4.0.2" target="_blank">http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/externalpackages/parmetis-4.0.2</a><br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> to:<br>
> > > >>> <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/pkg-metis-5.0.2" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/pkg-metis-5.0.2</a><br>
> > > >>> <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/pkg-parmetis-4.0.2" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/pkg-parmetis-4.0.2</a><br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> etc..<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> 3. Are AMS, ctetgen, win32fe special packages and be listed at toplevel?<br>
> > > >>> currently ctetgen is listed under 'externalpackages'. Should it be at toplevel?<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> i.e<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/win32fe-dev" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/win32fe-dev</a><br>
> > > >>> <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/ams-dev" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/ams-dev</a><br>
> > > >>> <a href="https://bitbucket.org/petsc/ctetgen-dev" target="_blank">https://bitbucket.org/petsc/ctetgen-dev</a><br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> Any thoughts?<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>> thanks,<br>
> > > >>> Satish<br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >>><br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >><br>
> > > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div>Dmitry Karpeev, Ph.D.</div><div>Assistant Computational Mathematician</div><div>Mathematics and Computer Science</div><div>Argonne National Laboratory</div>
<div>Argonne, Illinois, USA</div><div>and</div><div>Fellow</div><div>Computation Institute</div><div>University of Chicago</div><div>5735 S. Ellis Avenue</div><div>Chicago, IL 60637</div><div>-----------------------</div>
<div>Phone: 630-252-1229</div><div>Fax: 630-252-5986</div><br>